The 'Holocaust exception' - the doctrine in international law which states that international law applies to everybody in the world except Jews - has now been extended so that American laws against espionage and treason apply to everybody except Jews.

What happens when the characters in the AIPAC spy case are replaced with Chinese? The judge, T.S. Ellis III, who must be a Christian Zionist hurrying up the Rapture, required that the case couldn't succeed unless:

The prosecutors reveal the contents of classified information to the public; and

The prosecutors prove the defendants intended to cause harm to the United States.

Of course, the rulings sunk the case. It is impossible for Israeli agents to cause harm to the United States as apparently the interests of Israel and the United States are exactly the same. Since the United States only remains a first-world economy because of being propped up by the Chinese, you could make a strong argument that it is really American and Chinese interests that are the same. If defense lawyers for Chinese spies act aggressively, will the judge give up and distinguish the AIPAC case by saying that the AIPAC dudes got off solely because they were Jews?

There is a remarkable move fromsome of the A-list blogs to sweep the connected Harman treason case under the rug by characterizing it as a turf war between Porter Goss and others (this despite the fact, as you can see at the 'Late Update 05/05/09, 10:30am' here, that the entire premise of the revisionism is untrue).

The AIPAC case isn't very complicated. Larry Franklin had some information on the American position on Iran which Israel didn't have. In order to manage its American serfs, the Lobby requires up-to-the-minute information on secret American strategic thinking (the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran was such a disaster for the Jews because it blindsided them). The AIPACers offered to help Larry Franklin on his career path - and gain a well-placed AIPAC agent - in return for classified info. That was what the FBI stumbled upon. Any fool can see this is espionage. The Jew-controlled NYT notwithstanding, the case has absolutely fuck-all to do with press freedoms. The AIPAC dudes weren't journalists and had no journalistic intent, and any judge could see that.

As James G. Abourezk notes, the entire prosecution of the case was weird. American prosecutors usually massively over-charge, so they can still obtain a conviction if they lose some of the charges, and have more negotiation room for a plea bargain. Prosecutors in this case bizarrely under-charged, passing over many more obvious choices to rely solely an obscure charge from the First World War. They set themselves up to fail. When Obama himself weighed in - to be sure that the end of the proceedings, just before the AIPAC conference, would be perceived as his personal gift to AIPAC - the game was over, and years of FBI work was flushed down the drain.

The Jews are out for FBI heads. The reason for this isn't just the characteristic Jewish desire for revenge (how dare you attack your superiors!). They want to permanently stop the FBI's search for the hidden Israeli super spies left untouched fro decades....

And there are still those who will call you an anti-Semite for suggesting that the Lobby has any power......!.